The development of interlanguage pragmatics in L2 Arabic: The production of apology strategies
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The six apology strategies proposed by Al Masaeed, Waugh, and Burns (2018) were explicitly instructed in both groups.
“Six strategies for apology proposed by Al Masaeed, Waugh, and Burns (2018) were explicitly instructed in both groups.”
From A comparative study of the effect of teacher’s group and individual feedback on Iranian EFL learners’ learning of speech acts in apology letter writing (2020) · cites this paper as Al Masaeed, Waugh, and Burns (2018)
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Pourmousavi, Z., & Mohamadi Zenouzagh, Z. (2020) · Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education · doi:10.1186/s40862-020-00088-w · Cited by 17 · see citing works
- Authors
- Al Masaeed, K., Waugh, L. R., & Burns, K. E.
- Affiliations
- University of Arizona (US)
- Carnegie Mellon University (US)
- Venue
- System
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2018-06
- Volume
- 74
- Pages
- 98-108
- ISSN
- 0346-251X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2793954336
- Cited by
- 29
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 1
- FWCI
- 15.47
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- System (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Linguistics and Language Analysis
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies
- Keywords
- interlanguage pragmatics, apology strategies, Arabic as a foreign language, second language acquisition, proficiency level, verbosity, native speaker norms, oral discourse
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
